City appeals over bluff sidewalk

Published 6:00 am Thursday, December 28, 2006

NATCHEZ &8212; Less than two weeks after a group of citizens appealed a circuit judge&8217;s ruling mostly in favor of the city, the city is appealing the ruling as well.

The city appealed the only portion of the pecan factory decision where Judge Forrest &8220;Al&8221; Johnson ruled against the city, saying &8220;securing&8221; the sidewalk along the bluff at night could interfere with public access to the sidewalk.

Attorney Walter Brown, representing the city in this case, said Wednesday the city was obligated to appeal the decision because securing the sidewalk was part of the deal struck with developer Worley Brown LLC.

Email newsletter signup

&8220;The city&8217;s obligated to go forward with the deal they made,&8221; Brown said. &8220;The city reserved the right to maintain that sidewalk on the option development agreement and did consent to it being secured after hours.&8221;

A group of citizens appealed Johnson&8217;s ruling Dec. 8. Their original appeal against the city said, among other things, that the city&8217;s sale of the old Natchez Pecan Shelling Factory for less than its appraised value was illegal.

Johnson&8217;s ruling, which originally stated it was not reasonable or lawful to restrict public access to the sidewalk, will be appealed to the Mississippi Supreme Court.

&8220;Anytime there&8217;s an appeal and you haven&8217;t prevailed on something you have originally agreed upon, it makes good sense to go forward and appeal those things,&8221; Brown said.

All the other sections of the decision were in favor of the city, including that the meetings and the sale of the land were legal.

Brown said it could be 18 months before the Supreme Court handed down a ruling on the matter.

Developer Larry Brown of Worley Brown LLC, no relation to the attorney, said the idea of fencing off the sidewalk came out of a concern for safety.

&8220;Originally, that had been important to us for security reasons to have the right to close off the sidewalk after dark,&8221; Brown said. &8220;Who would want the public to have free access to their front yard?&8221;

Later, as the design changed, they decided to gate the whole development, &8220;so the prior gates we had talked about were probably not even necessary,&8221; he said.

&8220;That, to us, was an issue that wasn&8217;t even really in the forefront any longer,&8221; he said. &8220;The sidewalk issue certainly would not prohibit us from going forward with our project.&8221;